Owensby v. State

Supreme Court of Alabama

Owensby v. State

82 Ala. 63

CourtSupreme Court of Alabama

DecidedDecember 15, 1886

StatusPublished

Cited by15 cases

This text of 82 Ala. 63 (Owensby v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Owensby v. State, 82 Ala. 63 (Ala. 1886).

Pincite

Opinion

CLOPTON, J.

— It is competent for the defendant to show by any legal evidence, that another committed the offense with which he is charged, and that he is free from participation in its commission; but it is well settled, that this can not be shown by the admissions or confessions of a third person, not under oath, such being mere hearsay. Wes v. State, 76 Ala. 98; Snow v. State, 58 Ala. 372. It is also said, that hearsay is not confined, in the legal sense, to what is said; that acts or conduct, as well as words, may be hearsay. — 1 Whar. on Ev. § 173. Plight on being accused of crime, excitement, and the exhibition of similar emotions, may be regarded in the nature of admissions, because arising from a consciousness of guilt; but, as they may naturally be produced, in some persons, by causes other than a sense of guilt, they are considered of the least probative force of all competent testimony; certainly not equal to a voluntary and deliberate declaration or confession. They are circumstances too uncertain and illusory to be reliable or admissible to prove the innocence of the accused, by showing the guilt of a third person. They are within the [65]*65reason and policy of the rule, which excludes the admissions or confessions of such other person . — Smith v. State, 9 Ala. 990.

The Circuit Court did not err in excluding the evidence of the excited appearance and flight of Moreman.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

CLOPTON, J.

— It is competent for the defendant to show by any legal evidence, that another committed the offense with which he is charged, and that he is free from participation in its commission; but it is well settled, that this can not be shown by the admissions or confessions of a third person, not under oath, such being mere hearsay. Wes v. State, 76 Ala. 98; Snow v. State, 58 Ala. 372. It is also said, that hearsay is not confined, in the legal sense, to what is said; that acts or conduct, as well as words, may be hearsay. — 1 Whar. on Ev. § 173. Plight on being accused of crime, excitement, and the exhibition of similar emotions, may be regarded in the nature of admissions, because arising from a consciousness of guilt; but, as they may naturally be produced, in some persons, by causes other than a sense of guilt, they are considered of the least probative force of all competent testimony; certainly not equal to a voluntary and deliberate declaration or confession. They are circumstances too uncertain and illusory to be reliable or admissible to prove the innocence of the accused, by showing the guilt of a third person. They are within the [65]*65reason and policy of the rule, which excludes the admissions or confessions of such other person . — Smith v. State, 9 Ala. 990.

The Circuit Court did not err in excluding the evidence of the excited appearance and flight of Moreman.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

82 Ala. 63, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/owensby-v-state-ala-1886.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack